This website provides readers an historical perspective on the evolution of various healthcare laws and regulations affecting healthcare freedom and privacy.
For updated information about healthcare freedom and privacy issues, visit Citizens' Council for Health Freedom's website www.healthcarefreedom.us

This report is based on the results of a survey conducted
by The Gallup
Organization on behalf of the Institute for Health Freedom.
The opinions of a national cross-section of adults in telephone
owning households, 18 years of age or older, concerning access
and the confidentiality of their medical records were obtained.

A national cross-section of telephone households was systematically
selected using random digit dialing techniques to ensure the
inclusion of households with both listed and unlisted telephone
numbers. Everyone was interviewed between August 11, 2000
to August 26, 2000. A total of 1,000 interviews were completed.
Results based on the entire sample are accurate with a plus
or minus 3-percentage point margin of error at the 95% confidence
level. The sampling tolerances will be found in the technical
appendix of this report.

For most adults the confidentiality of their medical records
is very important, and only the confidentiality of financial
information is judged very important by a greater proportion.
Over eight in ten adults (84%) report it is very important
that their financial information be kept confidential. Almost
as many (78%) feel it is very important that their medical
records be kept confidential. While important to many adults,
less than half (39%) feel it is very important that their
employment history be kept confidential, and fewer (30%) feel
it is very important that their educational history be kept
confidential.

Women are more likely than men to feel it is very important
their medical records should be kept confidential (81% and
74%, respectively). In addition, older adults, particularly
those 35 to 49, are more likely than adults 18 to 34 years
of age to say it is very important that their medical records
be kept confidential.

Given the importance attached to keeping their medical records
confidential, it is not surprising that many adults oppose
access by any group. Asked if they favored or opposed allowing
various groups to see their medical records without permission
there is no group that a majority of adults would favor allowing
access to their medical records without their authorization.

The most "acceptable" group would be pharmacists, four in
ten adults (40%) would favor allowing pharmacists to see their
medical records without permission while 59% would be opposed.

There is strong opposition to non-medical groups gaining
access to their medical records. Nine out of ten (92%) oppose
giving government agencies access. About as many (88%) oppose
the police or lawyers, or employers (84%) being allowed to
see their medical records. Similarly, 82% oppose letting insurance
companies see their medical records without permission. Over
nine in ten (95%) oppose allowing banks to see their medical
records without permission. Local and state health departments
are acceptable to a larger proportion compared to government
agencies overall, nevertheless, 71% oppose giving these agencies
access to medical information without permission.

Opinion is no different when it comes to medical doctors
other than those given permission by the respondent. Seven
in ten (71%) oppose giving doctors access to their medical
records without permission. Medical researchers would be denied
access too - two-thirds (67%) oppose allowing researchers
permission to see their medical records without permission.

While controlling access to their medical records is important
to many, relatively few adults (16%) have heard or read anything
recently about new federal regulations that would change the
rules regarding access to medical records. Adults, age 50
or older (20%) and college-educated adults (19%) are more
likely than others to say they have heard about the issue.

Asked their opinion of keeping their medical records in
a national computerized database, most adults (88%) are opposed.
Only 10% would favor keeping records in a national database.
Adults, ages 35 to 49 are more likely than younger or older
adults to oppose a national database for medical records.
Similarly, college educated adults are more likely than those
with fewer years of formal education to oppose a national
database (93% and 83%, respectively).

Few adults (12%) have seen or heard anything recently about
a proposal to assign medical identification numbers. Even
fewer (8%) adults support a plan that requires every American
to be assigned a medical identification number. Adults 35
years of age or older are more likely than younger adults
to be aware of the medical identification proposals.

Over nine in ten adults (95%) say doctors and hospitals
should have to obtain their permission before releasing medical
records to a national database. In addition, only 4% believe
personal information told a doctor in confidence and entered
into their medical records should be included in the national
database.

Most adults (86%) feel a physician should ask permission
first before running additional tests, during the course of
regular testing, for genetic factors that may be related to
possible health problems. Approximately one in seven (14%)
feel the physician should be allowed to run the additional
tests without asking permission.

Over nine in ten adults (93%) feel medical and government
researchers should obtain permission before studying a person's
genetic information. Less than one in ten (6%) feel it isn't
necessary to obtain the person's permission.

How important is it to you that information
in the following areas be kept confidential; that is, no one
can see it without your permission - very important, somewhat
important, not too important, or not at all important?

Financial information

Employment history

Medical records

Educational history

Over eight in ten adults (84%) report it is very important
that their financial information be kept confidential. Almost
as many (78%) feel it is very important that their medical
records be kept confidential. While important to most adults,
less than half (39%) feel it is very important that their
employment history be kept confidential, and fewer (30%)
feel it is very important that their educational history
be kept confidential.

IMPORTANCE OF CONFIDENTIALITY (n=1000)

Women are more likely than men to feel it is very important
their medical records should be kept confidential (81% and
74%, respectively).

Older adults, particularly those 35 to 49 (83%), are more
likely than adults 18 to 34 years of age (71%) to say their
medical records should be kept confidential.

Women and adults, 35 to 49 years of age, are more likely
than others to consider keeping their financial information
confidential very important.

Have you heard, read or seen anything recently
about new federal regulations that would change the rules
regarding who is allowed to see your medical records?

Relatively few adults (16%) have heard or read
anything recently about new federal regulations that would
change the rules regarding access to medical records. Adults,
age 50 or older (20%) and college-educated adults (19%)
are more likely than others to say they have heard about
the issue.

Who do you think should be allowed to see your
medical records without your permission? I am going to read
you a list of some groups; for each, please tell me whether
you favor or oppose allowing them to see YOUR medical records
without FIRST obtaining YOUR permission. How about . . .?

Medical doctors OTHER than the ones you have given
permission

Pharmacists

Medical researchers

The police or lawyers

Local and state health departments

Banks

Insurance companies

Employers

Government agencies

Asked if they favored or opposed allowing various groups
to see their medical records without permission there is
no group that a majority of adults would favor allowing
access to their medical records without their authorization.

The most "acceptable" group would be pharmacists. Four
in ten adults would favor allowing pharmacists to see
their medical records without permission while 59% would
be opposed. In contrast, the least "acceptable" group
would be banks, only 5% would favor allowing banks to
see their medical records without permission.

There is strong opposition to other non-medical groups
seeing their medical records. Nine out of ten (92%) oppose
giving government agencies access. About as many (88%)
oppose the police or lawyers, or employers (84%) being
allowed to see their medical records. Similarly, 82% oppose
letting insurance companies see their medical records
without permission.

Local and state health departments are acceptable to
a larger proportion compared to government agencies overall,
however, 71% oppose giving these agencies access to medical
information without permission, too. Opinion is no different
when it comes to medical doctors other than ones given
permission by the respondent. Seven in ten (71%) oppose
giving doctors access to their medical records without
permission. Medical researchers fare no better than doctors
-- two-thirds (67%) oppose allowing researchers permission
to see their medical records without permission.

There has been a lot of discussion lately about
REQUIRING that all patient medical records be stored in a
national computerized database. The database would store medical
records on patients over their lifetime. Others would be able
to use the information without first obtaining a patients'
permission. Would you favor or oppose keeping your medical
records this way?

Most adults (88%) are opposed to keeping their
medical records in a national computerized database. Only
10% would favor the plan described to them.

Have you heard, read or seen anything recently
about a federal proposal to assign medical identification
numbers, similar to a social security number, to you and all
other Americans to create a national database of medical records?

Question 6

Would you support a plan that REQUIRES every
American, including you, to be assigned a medical identification
number, similar to a social security number, to track your
medical records and place them in a national computer database
without your permission?

One in eight adults (12%) have seen or heard
something recently about a proposal to assign medical identification
numbers. Somewhat fewer (8%) adults support a plan that
requires every American to be assigned a medical identification
number.

AWARE OF FEDERAL PROPOSAL REGARDING MEDICAL ID NUMBERS
(n=1000)

SUPPORT PLAN THAT REQUIRES ASSIGNED MEDICAL ID NUMBER (n=1000)

Adults 35 years of age or older are more likely than younger
adults to be aware of the medical identification proposals
(14% and 7%, respectively).

College educated adults (16%) are more likely than those
with less than a college education (8%) to say they are
aware of proposals for medical identification numbers.

Support for medical identification numbers is highest
in the Midwest (12%) and lowest in the West (3%).

Do you think doctors and hospitals should have
to obtain your PERMISSION before they could release your medical
records to a national computerized database?

Question 8

If you tell a doctor personal things about
yourself in confidence, and the doctor records that information
in your medical records, should the doctor be required to
include that information in a national database without your
permission?

Over nine in ten adults (95%) say doctors and
hospitals should have to obtain their permission before
releasing medical records to a national database. In addition,
only 4% believe personal information told a doctor in confidence
and entered into their medical records should be included
in the national database.

PERMISSION SHOULD BE OBTAINED BEFORE RELEASING MEDICAL
RECORDS (n=1000)

SHOULD PERSONAL INFORMATION TOLD TO MEDICAL DOCTOR IN CONFIDENCE
BE INCLUDED IN NATIONAL DATABASE? (n=1000)

If you go to a DOCTOR to have your blood tested
for sugar or for high cholesterol, should your doctor also
be allowed to test your blood for genetic factors that, for
example, could reveal whether you are prone to cancer later
in life, without first obtaining your permission, or do you
feel your doctor should first obtain your permission?

Most adults (86%) feel a physician should ask
permission first before running additional tests, during
the course of regular testing, for genetic factors that
may be related to possible health problems. Approximately
one in seven (14%) feel the physician should be allowed
to run the additional tests without asking permission.

SHOULD DOCTOR TEST FOR GENETIC FACTORS WITHOUT PERMISSION?
(n=1000)

Women (88%) are more likely than men (84%) to feel a physician
should ask permission before conducting additional tests.

Should medical and government RESEARCHERS be
allowed to STUDY your genetic information (for example, to
identify genes thought to be associated with various medical
conditions) without first obtaining your permission, or do
you feel they should first obtain your permission?

Over nine in ten adults (93%) feel medical and
government researchers should obtain permission before studying
a person's genetic information. Less than one in ten (6%)
feel it isn't necessary to obtain the person's permission.

SHOULD RESEARCHERS BE ALLOWED TO STUDY GENETIC INFORMATION
WITHOUT PERMISSION? (n=1000)

In interpreting survey results, it should be borne in mind
that all sample surveys are subject to sampling error, that
is, the extent to which the results may differ from what would
be obtained if the whole population had been interviewed.
The size of such sampling errors depends largely on the number
of interviews.

The following tables may be used in estimating the sampling
error of any percentage in this report. The computed allowances
have taken into account the effect of the sample design upon
sampling error. They may be interpreted as indicating the
range (plus or minus the figure shown) within which the results
of repeated samplings in the same time period could be expected
to vary, 95 percent of the time, assuming the same sampling
procedures, the same interviewers, and the same questionnaire.

The first table shows how much allowance should be made
for the sampling error of a percentage:

The table would be used in the following manner: Let us say
a reported percentage is 33 for a group which includes 1000
respondents. Then we go to row "percentages near 30" in the
table and go across to the column headed "1000". The number
at this point is 3, which means that the 33 percent obtained
in the sample is subject to a sampling error of plus or minus
3 points. Another way of saying it is that very probably (95
chances of 100) the true figure would be somewhere between 30
and 36, with the most likely figure the 33 obtained.

In comparing survey results in two samples, such as, for
example, men and women, the question arises as to how large
a difference between them must be before one can be reasonably
sure that it reflects a real difference. In the tables below,
the number of points which must be allowed for in such comparisons
is indicated.

Two tables are provided. One is for percentages near 20
or 80; the other for percentages near 50. For percentages
in between, the error to be allowed for is between those shown
in the two tables.